Xu, Timothy T.

Background and Objective: This study aimed to characterize clinical characteristics and visual outcomes of patients with hemorrhagic choroidal detachments. Patients and Methods: Single-center retrospective case series of patients with hemorrhagic choroidal detachments from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2020 at Mayo Clinic. Patients were categorized as appositional or non-appositional based on ultra-sonography. Results: Among 39 cases with hemorrhagic choroidal detachments, 15 (38%) were appositional and 24 (62%) were non-appositional. There was a significant difference between the appositional and non-appositional groups in mean initial logMAR visual acuity (VA) (2.8 [ SD = 0.20] vs 2.2 [ SD = 0.78], P < .001). However, no difference was observed in final logMAR VA (1.9 [ SD = 1.2] vs 1.5 [ SD = 1.1], P = .30). Comparison between surgical ( N = 9) versus non-surgical ( N = 5) hemorrhagic appositional choroidal detachments cases revealed no differences in outcomes. Comparison between anticoagulated ( N = 21) versus nonanticoagulated ( N = 18) patients with hemorrhagic choroidal detachments also revealed no differences in outcomes. Conclusion: Patients with appositional and nonappositional hemorrhagic choroidal detachments did not differ significantly with regards to visual outcome. Surgical intervention was not associated with improved final vision in this cohort.

e19503 Background: The uptake of BCMA directed ADCs in MM has been hindered by ocular toxicity. Belantamab mafodotin (BM) and MEDI2228 (MEDI) are BCMA directed monoclonal antibodies conjugated to the microtubule inhibitor, monomethyl auristatin F and the alkylator, pyrrolobenzodiazepine, respectively. Differences in the ADCs payload, antibody specificity and linker stability influence ocular toxicity. We investigated the patterns of ocular toxicity and tolerability of BCMA directed ADC therapy. Methods: Retrospective study of MM patients who commenced treatment with a commercial or investigational BCMA directed ADC at the Mayo Clinic between 2019-22. Results: 111 patients were included, the median age was 69 and median follow up 40 months. The median number of prior treatments was 6, 87% of patients were triple class refractory, 50% penta class refractory, 14% had prior BCMA directed therapy and 24% had extraosseous disease. Treatments included BM (n=56, 50%), BM in combination with other MM therapy (n=12, 11%) and MEDI (n=43, 39%). The overall response rate was 30% for BM and 44% for MEDI. The median OS and PFS for BM was 8 and 2 months, the median OS and PFS for MEDI was 11 and 5 months. The median number of ADC cycles was 2.5. Ocular toxicity is summarized in the table 1. Keratopathy was more common with BM (p=0.004). Only 4 MEDI patients developed keratopathy, all grade 1 and associated with dry eyes and/or photophobia. In contrast, 60% of BM patients developed keratopathy (13% grade 3-4 keratopathy). The median time to keratopathy onset was 1 month with BM, and 2.8 with MEDI. The median time until keratopathy was 4.6 months for BM. Loss of best-corrected visual acuity (VA) was significantly more common with BM (p<0.001). The median time to any decline in VA was 1.5 months for BM and 2.3 for MEDI. The median time until VA returned to baseline was 2.4 months for BM and 2.3 for MEDI. The frequency of dose delays for ocular toxicity was comparable between ADCs, as was the number of dose reductions (16% BM vs. 12% MEDI, p=0.5). The most common reasons for treatment discontinuation were progression or death (BM=69%, MEDI=44%) and ocular toxicity (BM=18%, MEDI=30%). Conclusions: Treatment interruptions, dose reductions and drug discontinuation are common with BCMA directed ADC therapy. Further research to optimize the administration schedule of these agents is warranted. BM and MEDI produce distinct patterns of ocular side effects, namely keratopathy and reduced VA with the former, and photophobia and dry eyes with the latter. BM N = 68 MEDI N = 43 p-value 2 Prophylactic steroid eye drops 4 (6%) 28 (68%) <0.001 Prophylactic lubricant eye drops 42 (63%) 33 (80%) 0.051 Max grade keratopathy 0.004 1-2 29 (47%) 4 (19%) 3-4 8 (13%) 0 (0%) VA equal or worse than 20/40 26 (68%) 6 (20%) <0.001 Days of ADC treatment 59 (33, 167) 68 (41, 105) 0.9 Dose delay for ocular toxicity 19 (28%) 8 (19%) 0.2 n (%); Median (IQR); 2 Chisq test; Wilcoxon rank sum.

Purpose: To identify demographic and clinical factors associated with delayed diagnosis in patients with primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (VRL). Methods: Retrospective, tertiary referral center-based cohort study of all patients at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, with a biopsy-proven diagnosis of VRL from January 1, 2000, to October 31, 2022. Results: There were 87 patients included during the 22-year study period with 73 patients (83.9%) diagnosed with VRL upon initial evaluation at the tertiary center, with the other 14 patients (16.1%) diagnosed later. The median referral time was 4.8 months (range: 0–113 months). Patients who received an initial diagnosis of inflammatory uveitis or another incorrect diagnosis elsewhere were referred slower than those initially diagnosed with VRL (P = 0.04). The most common incorrect initial diagnosis from an outside institution was inflammatory uveitis (n = 35, 40.2%). When patients were split into four groups based on referral time, prior use of corticosteroids was associated with a significant delay in referral (P = 0.03). Conclusion: Diagnosing VRL continues to be challenging, as months-long delays from initial evaluation to expert referral center evaluation are common. Prior use of corticosteroids was associated with delay in diagnosis and referral time, underscoring the need to increase awareness regarding differences between VRL and uveitis.